Case law

United States v. Granvel E. Windom

19 F.3d 1190 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Mar 24, 1994

Windom’s concern that his memory might have faded “is insufficient to *1196 establish that the delay impaired his defense.” Brock, 782 F.2d at 1447 . … Clearly, in light of the prevailing standard in this circuit, the evidence was sufficient to support Windom’s conviction on Count Seven. 2.

Akande v. Grounds

555 F.3d 586 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Feb 9, 2009

Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages where their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. … “clearly established” at the time of the defendant’s alleged misconduct.

Rogers v. Pendleton

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · May 9, 2001

While a consensus of cases of persuasive authority may clearly establish a right for qualified immunity purposes, the inverse is also true: if there are no cases of controlling authority in the jurisdiction in question, and … if other appellate federal courts have split on the question of whether an asserted right exists, the right cannot be clearly established for qualified immunity purposes.

Farag v. United States

587 F. Supp. 2d 436 · District Court, E.D. New York · Nov 24, 2008

the defense of qualified immunity, which “shields government officials performing discretionary functions ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … “As a general rule, police officers are entitled to qualified immunity if (1) their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional rights, or (2) it was objectively reasonable for them to believe their acts did

Jazmine Bryant v. Bill Hensley

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 19, 2024

In Hunter and Payne’s view, that response failed to argue that qualified immunity did not apply to them. True, Bryant’s estate bears the burden of showing that qualified immunity does not apply. See Blake v. … Edmonson County, 18 F.4th 516, 530 (6th Cir. 2021) (holding that the defendant acted in bad faith and was “not eligible for state qualified immunity” under Kentucky law because he violated the plaintiff’s “clearly established

Tashonda Troupe v. St. Louis County, Missouri

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Jul 11, 2025

“A public official is entitled to qualified immunity unless: (1) their conduct violated a constitutional right, and (2) that right was clearly established.” Davis v. Buchanan Cnty., 11 F.4th 604, 623 (8th Cir. 2021). … “Qualified immunity is ‘appropriate where no reasonable fact finder could conclude that the facts when viewed in a light most favorable to the plaintiff show that the officers’ conduct violated a clearly established constitutional

Bunting v. Mellen

541 U.S. 1019 · Supreme Court of the United States · Apr 26, 2004

immunity. … The Court of Appeals concluded that Bunting is entitled to qualified immunity, id., at 376, and respondents have not challenged that ruling.

McCollum v. Drewitz

District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Oct 3, 2022

qualified immunity from suits for damages ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” … immunity” because the law at the time did not clearly establish that his doing so violated McCollum’s rights.

Pritzker v. City of Hudson

26 F. Supp. 2d 433 · District Court, N.D. New York · Oct 30, 1998

Qualified Immunity Defendants claim that, even if plaintiff can establish a prima facie case of malicious prosecution, they are entitled to qualified immunity. … “Even where a right is clearly established, an official is entitled to qualified immunity nevertheless if ‘it was objectively reasonable for the public official to believe that his acts did not violate th[at] right[ ].’ ”

Morales v. Chadbourne

793 F.3d 208 · Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · Jul 17, 2015

Donaghy argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity on Morales's Fourth Amendment claim because the law was not clearly established in 2009 that an ICE agent was required to have probable cause before issuing a detainer … For the reasons stated above, we affirm the district court's denial of qualified immunity on Morales's Fourth Amendment claim against Donaghy on the ground that the law was clearly established in 2009 that an ICE agent

City of Saint Albans v. Botkins

228 W. Va. 393 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 23, 2011

As to the second step of the qualified immunity inquiry— whether the constitutional standards were clearly established at the time in question— the Ninth Circuit concluded it should be answered by applying the same test the … Is there qualified immunity?

White v. City Of Markham

310 F.3d 989 · Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · Nov 13, 2002

Qualified Immunity 7 The plaintiffs contend that the district court erred in dismissing the claims against Officer Muldrow and Chief Lymore based on qualified immunity. … The plaintiffs bear the burden of establishing the existence of a clearly established constitutional right. See Rakovich v.

Lipkin

District Court, D. Connecticut · Mar 31, 2026

“Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” City of Escondido v. … Moreover, in the First Amendment context, the Second Circuit has recognized that qualified immunity is not available where (1) “specific intent of a defendant is an element of plaintiff’s claim under clearly established

Jamal Murray v. State of Ohio Dep't of Corrections

29 F.4th 779 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · Mar 30, 2022

motion is based on a claim of qualified immunity.” … Heyd is entitled to qualified immunity as a matter of law We now consider the merits of the qualified-immunity defense.

Vinzant v. King

464 U.S. 965 · Supreme Court of the United States · Nov 7, 1983

Thunderhawk v. Morton, County of, North Dakota

District Court, D. North Dakota · Nov 6, 2023

established prong of qualified immunity under the circumstances of this case. … Plaintiffs have failed to provide a factually similar case sufficient to support the clearly established prong of the qualified immunity analysis.

Bissell v. Mata

District Court, W.D. Texas · Jun 16, 2025

The Fifth Circuit held that the child protective workers were entitled to qualified immunity because the right to family integrity was not clearly established under those facts. … entitled to qualified immunity.

Deputy J.K. Maston v. Thomas Jefferson Wagner

236 W. Va. 488 · West Virginia Supreme Court · Nov 10, 2015

the involved conduct did not violate clearly established laws of which a reasonable official would have known.”).9 A public officer is entitled to qualified immunity for discretionary acts, even if committed negligently … A litigant may pierce the shield of qualified immunity by showing that a government official has violated a clearly established statutory or constitutional right.

Vaseleros-Stevenson v. Calvert County, Maryland

District Court, D. Maryland · Feb 17, 2021

Plaintiff frequently viisconstrues the “clearly established” prong of the analysis. … He is clearly entitled to qualified immunity. Plaintiffs § 1983 claim asserted against him is therefore DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. B.

Ortiz v. Mora

District Court, D. New Mexico · Dec 10, 2019

However, Mora violated no clearly established law and therefore is entitled to qualified immunity. The Court also holds that Plaintiff’s Fed. R. Civ. … “Qualified immunity attaches when an official’s conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’” White v. Pauly, 137 S.